> I think a safe thing to do would be work on a tool that only lets > you split hunks (and not edit them). Putting in type witnesses to > clarify what I mean, your patch converter function could be something > like > > p C(x y) -> FL p C(x y) > > I'm not sure if I've got the types exactly right here, but hopefully > this gives you some ideas. > > Do these two thoughts give you any extra traction? Maybe other people > on this list would have some ideas to help out...
My idea (which i never got around to implement) was that given these difficulties, a first step would be to give up on-line splitting/editting of hunks, and offer off-line editing. For this, we would need record to optionally dump the patch it would record instead of recording it, and have an option to read it back (non-interactively). So instead of darcs record -do you want to record this hunk ? -i'd rather split it -where do you want to split it -there [-other patches] -kthx end of darcs record you would have darcs record -do you want to record this hunk ? -yes please [-other patches] -record, abort or dump? -dump please end of darcs record, nothing recorded emacs to-be-recorded.patch darcs record --read to-be-recorded.patch done Maybe it's the lazy solution. It's not very darcs-ish in terms of UI, but it might also be useful for transplant (take a patch from another repository, and import it via record). It could also be useful without hunk-splitting, whenever you want to have a global vision of what hunks you record before recording them, and do the choosing in a full fledged editor interface (for example if you want to record hunks matching a given pattern, or that kind of things). For what it's worth, Florent _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
